British Journal of Management, Vol.

31, 325–343 (2020)

DOI: 10.1111/1467-8551.12396

Managers’ Resources for Authentic

Leadership – a Multi-study Exploration
of Positive Psychological Capacities and
Ethical Organizational Climates
Martin P. Fladerer and Susanne Braun1
Center for Leadership and People Management, LMU Munich, Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1, Munich, 80539,
Germany 1 Durham University Business School, Durham University, Mill Hill Lane, Durham, DH1 3LB, UK
Corresponding author email: martin.fladerer@psy.lmu.de

While authentic leadership is highly valued in today’s business world, managers do not
necessarily have the resources to attain it. Building on conservation of resources theory,
we propose a conceptual model to address how personal and contextual resources predict
authentic leadership. Study 1 analyses the day-to-day variability in managers’ positive
psychological capacities as personal resources in relation to changes in authentic leader-
ship. In addition, it tests ethical organizational climates as stable, contextual resources
for authentic leadership. In Study 2, we replicate our results on the between-person level
and extend the research model by exploring promotion focus as a link in the relation-
ship between personal resources and authentic leadership. Evidence from an experience
sampling study with 89 managers surveyed daily on 10 consecutive working days (Study
1) and a field survey of 130 managers at two points in time (Study 2) supports the hy-
pothesized role of personal resources and promotion focus for authentic leadership. In
both studies, only principled but not benevolent ethical organizational climates emerged
as a contextual resource for authentic leadership. We discuss the implications for current
management research and practice.

Introduction and Avolio, 2003), scholars call for a better un-

Authentic leadership (AL) is highly valued in
today’s business world as it relates to positive
outcomes for employees and organizations (Banks
et al., 2016; Gardner et al., 2011; Gill and
Caza, 2018; Hoch et al., 2018). While substantial
progress has been made in the study of AL since its
introduction (Avolio and Gardner, 2005; Luthans
Both authors contributed equally to this work. We sin-
cerely thank Hannes Leroy, Birgit Schyns, Maria Agthe
and Dieter Frey for their excellent feedback on ear-
lier drafts of this manuscript. We sincerely thank Simon
Grund for providing comprehensive support with the
multiple imputation procedure.
We are grateful for the financial support of this research
received from Durham University Business School.
derstanding of the theoretical underpinnings of
AL and greater plurality in methodological ap-
proaches to fully develop its theoretical and practi-
cal merit (Alvesson and Einola, 2019; Iszatt-White
and Kempster, 2018; Sidani and Rowe, 2018).
In the present paper, we seek to advance AL the-
ory and its managerial implications in three ways.
Firstly, we build on conservation of resources
(COR) theory (Hobfoll, 1989, 2001; Hobfoll
et al., 2018) – a well-established theory in the
organizational behaviour literature (Halbesleben
et al., 2014) – to better understand the antecedents
of AL. According to COR theory’s distinction
between personal and contextual resources, we
predict that managers draw from positive psy-
chological capacities (i.e. personal resources),


C 2020 The Authors. British Journal of Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Academy
of Management. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main
Street, Malden, MA, 02148, USA.
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, which
permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used
for commercial purposes.

326
which are proximate to the self, as well as the
ethical organizational climate (i.e. contextual
resources), which is grounded in the social context
(Halbesleben et al., 2014; Hobfoll, 2002; ten
Brummelhuis and Bakker, 2012). This distinction
also speaks to recent views in COR theory that
‘resources exist in caravans’ (Hobfoll, 2011, p.
116), counterbalancing the emphasis on studying
one resource at a time (Hobfoll et al., 2018).
Assuming that ‘work and organizational settings
can create ecologies that foster engagement and
resilience’ (Hobfoll, 2011, p. 117), we argue that
both personal resources (i.e. positive psychological
capacities) and contextual resources (i.e. ethical
organizational climates) facilitate managers’ AL.
Secondly, responding to current debates in the
management literature to what extent promotion
focus – a self-regulatory orientation towards
individuals’ ideals and aspirations (Higgins,
1997) – explains why managers show positive
leadership behaviours (Johnson et al., 2017; Kark
and van Dijk, 2019; Sassenberg and Hamstra,
2017; Tuncdogan, van den Bosch and Volberda,
2015), we apply COR theory to explore the role of
managers’ promotion focus as a mediator linking
personal resources to AL. Luthans and Avolio
(2003) positioned self-regulation as a central part
of AL (see also Gardner et al., 2005). However, AL
scholars’ perspectives on the role of self-regulation
differ and have not been tested empirically (Avolio
and Gardner, 2005; Gardner et al., 2011). We
test whether the alignment with one’s ideal self as
inherent in self-regulatory promotion focus medi-
ates the relationship between personal resources
and managers’ AL.
Finally, we incorporate the called-for temporal
element into management theorizing and research
(Fischer, Dietz and Antonakis, 2017; Kelemen,
Matthews and Breevaart, 2019; McClean et al.,
2019; McCormick et al., 2018), especially in re-
lation to AL (Alvesson and Einola, 2019; Ibarra,
2015; Sidani and Rowe, 2018). Kelemen, Matthews
and Breevaart (2019) argue that ‘studying lead-
ership in a daily fashion is critical [ . . . ] as it gives
unique insight that cannot be easily captured in
other ways’ (p. 2). Day-level research enables (1)
testing of leadership theories at the within-person
level (see also McCormick et al., 2018); (2) in-
depth insights into the short-term processes of
leadership; and (3) the analysis of leadership in its
natural context. Despite its original formulation
as a dynamic phenomenon (Avolio and Gardner,

C 2020 The Authors. British Journal of Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British
14678551, 2020, 2, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8551.12396 by Quaid-I-Azam University, Wiley Online Library on [11/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
M. P. Fladerer and S. Braun
2005; see also Cooper, Scandura and Schriesheim,
2005; Luthans and Avolio, 2003; May et al., 2003),
in the study of AL ‘these good intentions have
later been largely replaced by static [ . . . ] concep-
tualizations and empirical studies’ (Alvesson and
Einola, 2019, p. 387). Following these recent re-
views and meta-analyses (Kelemen, Matthews and
Breevaart, 2019; McClean et al., 2019; Podsakoff
et al., 2019), we explore AL at the day level.
In sum, adopting a resource-based perspective
grounded in COR theory (Halbesleben et al.,
2014; Hobfoll, 2001, 2002, 2011; Hobfoll et al.,
2018), we apply two complementary methodologi-
cal approaches to explore personal and contextual
resources as predictors of AL and incorporate
temporal dynamics (Fischer, Dietz and Antonakis,
2017; Kelemen, Matthews and Breevaart, 2019;
McClean et al., 2019; Podsakoff et al., 2019;
Shamir, 2011). Study 1 employs an experience
sampling design to quantify the proportion of
within-person variance in AL over time and how
personal resources drive these fluctuations (Kele-
men, Matthews and Breevaart, 2019; McClean
et al., 2019). Furthermore, we investigate ethi-
cal organizational climates as stable contextual
resources for AL (Luthans and Avolio, 2003;
Petersen and Youssef-Morgan, 2018). In Study 2,
a field study with two points of measurement, we
examine promotion focus as an underlying process
linking personal resources and AL (Kark and van
Dijk, 2019). Here we test personal resources and
AL on a between-person level of analysis and repli-
cate the findings of the role of contextual resources.
The multi-study approach allows us to construc-
tively replicate (Eden, 2002) and compare results
(Iszatt-White and Kempster, 2018; Xanthopoulou
et al., 2009), thereby advancing the understanding
of AL and COR theory at within- and between-
person levels of analysis (Kelemen, Matthews and
Breevaart, 2019; McCormick et al., 2018; Miller
and Bamberger, 2016; Podsakoff et al., 2019).
Figure 1 summarizes the conceptual model of
the present research.
Authentic leadership
AL means that managers enact their true selves
in the leadership role, and requires ‘being honest
with oneself [ . . . ], being sincere with others [ . . . ],
and behaving in a way that reflects one’s personal
values’ (Leroy et al., 2015, p. 1678). Authentic
Academy of Management.

Managers’ Resources for Authentic Leadership
Figure 1. Conceptual model of present research. In Study 1, the role of positive psychological capacities as antecedent of authentic leadership
was measured on the day level (within-person design). In Study 2, the role of positive psychological capacities as antecedent of authentic
leadership was measured on the general level (between-person design)
leaders demonstrate self-awareness in relation to
their personal values, strengths and weaknesses,
and impact on others. Their internalized moral
perspective manifests in actions guided by per-
sonal values, even in the face of external pressures.
Through balanced processing, authentic leaders
encourage others to voice opposing points of
view and carefully consider these before reaching
conclusions. Authentic leaders show relational
transparency as they express their true thoughts
and feelings (Avolio and Gardner, 2005; Neider
and Schriesheim, 2011; Walumbwa et al., 2008).
While a wealth of empirical research supports
the positive outcomes of AL for employees and
organizations (Banks et al., 2016; Gardner et al.,
2011; Gill and Caza, 2018; Hoch et al., 2018),
only few studies investigated predictors of AL
(cf. Petersen and Youssef-Morgan, 2018). Jensen
and Luthans (2006) found that managers’ psy-
chological capital related positively to AL. Pe-
tersen and Youssef-Morgan (2018) replicated this
finding. Their results also showed a positive first-
order correlation of perceptions of the organiza-
tion’s psychological climate and AL. Peus et al.
(2012) found that employees were more likely
to ascribe AL when they saw their managers

C2020 The Authors. British Journal of Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British
Academy of Management.
14678551, 2020, 2, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8551.12396 by Quaid-I-Azam University, Wiley Online Library on [11/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
327
as possessing high levels of self-knowledge and
self-consistency. Nübold, van Quaquebeke and
Hülsheger (2019) showed that managers’ mindful-
ness related positively to self- and other-ratings of
AL, and that a mindfulness intervention enhanced
AL perceptions. In sum, current evidence points
to managers’ personal characteristics as well as
the organizational context as facilitating factors
for AL.
At the same time, the current studies do not
inform us about at least three important issues.
First, it remains to be addressed whether AL fluc-
tuates over short periods of time and what drives
these fluctuations (Kelemen, Matthews and Bree-
vaart, 2019). Managers who act authentically on
one day may not necessarily do so tomorrow (cf.
Breevaart et al., 2014; Johnson et al., 2012; Kele-
men, Matthews and Breevaart, 2019). Johnson
et al. (2012) showed that (transformational) leader
behaviours fluctuate substantially between days
(within-person variance 37%). Original conceptu-
alizations of AL assumed such temporal dynam-
ics on the day level (Avolio and Gardner, 2005;
Cooper, Scandura and Schriesheim, 2005; Luthans
and Avolio, 2003; May et al., 2003), but research
has failed to study these fluctuations (e.g. Alvesson
 14678551, 2020, 2, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8551.12396 by Quaid-I-Azam University, Wiley Online Library on [11/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
328 M. P. Fladerer and S. Braun

and Einola, 2019; Ibarra, 2015; Iszatt-White and A resource-based perspective on authentic
Kempster, 2018). leadership
Second, previous research leaves unanswered
We build on COR theory (Halbesleben et al.,
why specific predictors such as personal resources
2014; Hobfoll, 1989, 2001; Hobfoll et al., 2018) as
enable managers to attain AL. We build on COR
a theoretical basis for understanding how and why
theory (Hobfoll, 1989, 2001; Hobfoll et al., 2018)
resources help managers to attain AL. The central
to test the role of managers’ promotion focus as
tenet of COR theory is that ‘people must invest
a mediating variable to explain why personal re-
resources in order to protect against resource loss,
sources facilitate managers’ AL (Johnson et al.,
recover from losses and gain resources’ (Hobfoll
2017; Kark and van Dijk, 2019; Sassenberg and
et al., 2018, p. 105). We apply COR theory’s princi-
Hamstra, 2017; Tuncdogan, van den Bosch and
ple of resource investment, arguing that managers
Volberda, 2015).
invest personal resources and contextual resources
Third, what is meant by ‘a positive, highly devel-
to attain AL as this facilitates further resource gain
oped organizational context and culture’ (Luthans
(Halbesleben et al., 2014). As COR theory assumes
and Avolio, 2003, p. 257) in the realm of AL
resource fluctuations (Halbesleben et al., 2014;
is yet to be fully understood (cf. Petersen and
Hobfoll, 2002), managers will show AL to the
Youssef-Morgan, 2018). Following recent empha-
extent that they have personal and contextual re-
sis on ethics in AL theory (Lemoine, Hartnell and
sources available. Researching personal resources
Leroy, 2019), we test the role of benevolent and
together with ethical organizational climates as
principled ethical organizational climates (Kish-
part of the contextual resources that facilitate
Gephart, Harrison and Treviño, 2010; Martin and
managers’ AL also answers Hobfoll et al.’s (2018)
Cullen, 2006; Victor and Cullen, 1988) as contex-
call for the study of resource caravans.
tual resources for AL from the perspective of COR
Managers struggle to attain AL due to a lack
theory (Hobfoll, 2011; Hobfoll et al., 2018).
of personal and contextual resources. Luthans
Temporal dynamics of authentic leadership and Avolio (2003) argued that managers need
‘positive psychological capacities and a positive,
Luthans and Avolio (2003) as well as Avolio and
highly developed organizational context and cul-
Gardner (2005) highlighted the dynamic nature of
ture’ (p. 257) to attain AL. Managers aspire to AL
AL. Cooper, Scandura and Schriesheim (2005) fur-
(George, 2007; Ibarra, 2015), striving to align their
ther suggested studying the temporal dynamics of
personal values, beliefs and goals with how they
AL as the extent to which managers have personal
behave ‘every day, in each and every interaction’
resources available from day to day. Incorporating
(May et al., 2003, p. 248). However, business prac-
temporal dynamics into the study of AL allows for
tice often requires them to make tough decisions,
a more fine-grained understanding of how and why
while lacking time to reflect and promote a bottom
managers lead authentically (Alvesson and Einola,
line that values profit over people (Peus, 2011).
2019; Ibarra, 2015). McClean et al. (2019) referred
In line with COR theory, we define resources
to three forms of temporal dynamics, describing
broadly as those entities (e.g. objects, states,
‘the degree and pattern by which leader behavior
conditions) which individuals perceive to support
changes over time’ (p. 481): (1) abrupt shifts; (2)
their goal attainment (Halbesleben et al., 2014).
gradual changes; and (3) short-term fluctuations.
Personal resources are proximate to the self,
Our research focuses on short-term behavioural
whereas contextual resources are external and
fluctuations, also termed the ‘ebb and flow’ of lead-
part of the social context (Hobfoll, 2002; ten
ership, as measured in experience sampling studies
Brummelhuis and Bakker, 2012). Specifically, we
(Podsakoff et al., 2019). Drivers of short-term
investigate three positive psychological capacities:
fluctuations in leadership are transient affective
self-efficacy, self-esteem and optimism. These rep-
and cognitive states linked to COR theory (Kele-
resent central personal resources in COR theory
men, Matthews and Breevaart, 2019; McClean
(Halbesleben et al., 2014; Hobfoll, 2002, 2011;
et al., 2019; McCormick et al., 2018), such as de-
Hobfoll et al., 2018). In addition, we test benevo-
mands (e.g. email load; Rosen et al., 2019) and the
lent and principled ethical organizational climates
availability (or lack of) resources (e.g. emotional
(Martin and Cullen, 2006; Victor and Cullen,
exhaustion; Whitman, Halbesleben and Holmes,
1988) as contextual resources. They represent an
2014).


C 2020 The Authors. British Journal of Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British
Academy of Management.

Managers’ Resources for Authentic Leadership
organization’s ‘core and unassailable principles’
(May et al., 2003, p. 251) and play a vital role in
organizational functioning (Barraquier, 2011; van
Prooijen and Ellemers, 2015). Ethical organiza-
tional climates are contextual resources because
they facilitate shared psychological environments,
which allow managers to align their personal
values, beliefs and goals with their actions (Eagly,
2005; Lemoine, Hartnell and Leroy, 2019; May
et al., 2003).
Positive psychological capacities as personal
resources
According to Xanthopoulou et al. (2007), per-
sonal resources are ‘aspects of the self that are
generally linked to resiliency and refer to individ-
uals’ sense of their ability to control and impact
upon their environment successfully’ (p. 123f).
They determine the extent to which employees
adapt to challenges at work (e.g. Hobfoll et al.,
2018; Judge et al., 1998; Xanthopoulou et al.,
2009). Employees draw from personal resources to
increase desirable, resource-intensive behaviours
such as speaking up (Ng and Feldman, 2012) and
helping others (Halbesleben and Wheeler, 2015).
In contrast, managers’ resource depletion relates
positively to abusive leadership and negatively to
transformational leadership (Byrne et al., 2014).
Drawing from this research, we argue that man-
agers’ self-efficacy, self-esteem and optimism relate
positively to managers’ AL (ten Brummelhuis and
Bakker, 2012; Xanthopoulou et al., 2007). Self-
efficacy incorporates individuals’ beliefs about
their ability to mobilize the motivation, cognitive
resources and courses of action necessary to exe-
cute behaviour in a given context (Bandura, 1997;
Stajkovic and Luthans, 1998). Self-esteem is ‘the
degree to which an individual believes him/herself
to be capable, significant and worthy as an orga-
nizational member’ (Pierce and Gardner, 2004,
p. 593). Optimism represents the cognitive ap-
praisal of events, especially the reappraisal of
negative or neutral situations (Seligman, 2006), as
well as contingency planning (Luthans, Youssef-
Morgan and Avolio, 2015). As resources ‘do not
exist individually but travel in packs, or caravans’
(Hobfoll et al., 2018, p. 106; see also Hob-
foll, 2011), self-efficacy, self-esteem and optimism
share common processes that drive motivation and
behaviour (Luthans and Youssef-Morgan, 2017;
Luthans et al., 2007) and are highly correlated

C2020 The Authors. British Journal of Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British
Academy of Management.
14678551, 2020, 2, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8551.12396 by Quaid-I-Azam University, Wiley Online Library on [11/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
329
(cf. Hobfoll, 2011). Research typically combines
them into an overarching personal resources
factor (e.g. Judge et al., 1998; Luthans et al., 2007;
Xanthopoulou et al., 2007), as we do in this work.
Personal resources are stable to an extent (e.g.
ten Brummelhuis and Bakker, 2012), but also vary
within short periods of time. In an experience sam-
pling study by Xanthopoulou et al. (2009), per-
sonal resources varied substantially over a 5-day
period. Two recent meta-analyses also show that
self-efficacy and self-esteem exhibit a meaningful
proportion of within-person variability (i.e. 36% –
McCormick et al., 2018; 39% – Podsakoff et al.,
2019).
Following COR theory’s principle of resource
investment, managers who experience high levels
of self-efficacy, self-esteem and optimism are more
likely to invest these resources towards attaining
AL. In contrast, managers who experience low
levels of positive psychological capacities will
protect their remaining resources (e.g. by acting
defensively) and are less likely to align their inner
and outer selves (Halbesleben et al., 2014; Hobfoll
et al., 2018). Specifically, managers who experience
high levels of self-efficacy beliefs seek accurate
information about their own abilities as well
as potential for further development (Luthans,
Youssef-Morgan and Avolio, 2015). Managers
who experience high levels of self-efficacy are
also better able to regulate their interpersonal be-
haviour (e.g. to overcome self-serving biases; Vohs
and Ciarocco, 2004). Managers who experience
high levels of self-esteem are less susceptible to
external influences, which would otherwise keep
them from enacting their true values (Pierce
and Gardner, 2004). Managers who experience
high levels of optimism reinterpret challenging
situations positively, rendering them more likely
to see personal development as ‘work in progress’
(Luthans and Youssef-Morgan, 2017) and seek out
opportunities for learning when facing setbacks
(Luthans, Youssef-Morgan and Avolio, 2015).
In contrast, managers who experience low levels
of self-efficacy are more likely to protect their
self-worth through self-enhancement and defen-
siveness (Kernis, 2003; Vohs and Ciarocco, 2004),
reducing self-awareness and balanced processing.
Individuals who experience low levels of self-
efficacy are more prone to external influences
rather than acting in line with their inner values
(Bandura et al., 2003). Low self-esteem also limits
expressing one’s true thoughts and feelings out of

330
fear of social judgement (Neider and Schriesheim,
2011; Walumbwa et al., 2008). Managers who
experience low levels of optimism will be more
concerned with their vulnerabilities, and less likely
to reinterpret challenges positively (Seligman,
2006). In sum, we suggest that managers who
experience high levels of positive psychological
capacities are likely to invest these personal
resources towards AL, whereas managers who
experience low levels of positive psychological
capacities are less likely to do so.
H1: Managers’ positive psychological capacities
are positively related to authentic leadership.
Ethical organizational climates as contextual
resources
Although contextual resources are provided by a
different source (i.e. social context), they are em-
ployed in the resource investment process similarly
to personal resources (Halbesleben et al., 2014).
According to COR theory, when contextual re-
sources nurture individuals’ aspirations, they are a
second pathway to gaining further resources, such
as AL (Hobfoll, 2001). Hobfoll (2011) described
nurturing and supportive types of resources that
organizational environments provide as resource
caravans. Organizational climates define what con-
stitutes right and expected behaviour in an orga-
nization (Schneider, Ehrhart and Macey, 2013),
and serve as contextual resources for employees
(e.g. Halbesleben et al., 2014; Hobfoll et al., 2018).
Ethical organizational climates represent specific
contextual resources for AL (Avolio and Gardner,
2005; Eagly, 2005; Luthans and Avolio, 2003; May
et al., 2003; Walumbwa et al., 2008).
Several types of ethical organizational climates
exist (Victor and Cullen, 1988), and can be present
at the same time (Kish-Gephart, Harrison and
Treviño, 2010; Martin and Cullen, 2006). Benevo-
lent ethical organizational climates imply an over-
arching concern for individual well-being. Em-
ployees in benevolent climates share a mutual sense
of care and concern for others (Victor and Cullen,
1988). Experiencing appreciation from close
others is a valuable resource as interpersonal con-
nections give rise to feelings of ‘being in the right
place’ (Hobfoll et al., 1990; Sarason and Sarason,
2009). Even when they encounter setbacks and
struggle to achieve AL, managers in benevolent
ethical organizational climates will feel accepted

C 2020 The Authors. British Journal of Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British
14678551, 2020, 2, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8551.12396 by Quaid-I-Azam University, Wiley Online Library on [11/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
M. P. Fladerer and S. Braun
and supported by co-workers. For example, man-
agers will be more likely to draw on their positive
relationships with others in the organization when
forced to make difficult decisions (George, 2007;
Ibarra, 2015). According to COR theory, these re-
lationships and social interactions form part of the
contextual resources that are available to managers
(Hobfoll, 2011; Hobfoll et al., 2018). Following
COR theory’s principle of resource investment,
we therefore propose that managers in benevolent
ethical organizational climates are likely to invest
these personal resources towards AL:
H2a: A benevolent ethical organizational cli-
mate relates positively to authentic leadership.
Principled ethical organizational climates pro-
vide ethical rules and policies for ethical behaviour
(Martin and Cullen, 2006). Actions are consid-
ered ethical when they comply with moral guide-
lines (Barnett and Vaicys, 2000). Codes of conduct
raise managers’ awareness of ethical behaviours
(Schminke, Ambrose and Neubaum, 2005; van
Sandt, Shepard and Zappe, 2006) and encour-
age them to reflect their own values (Shamir and
Eilam, 2005). Ethical rules and policies also reduce
uncertainty and accentuate personal accountabil-
ity when making difficult decisions (May et al.,
2003). Following COR theory, we position ethi-
cal rules and policies as part of the contextual re-
sources that are available to managers within a
principled organizational climate (Hobfoll, 2011).
Managers who experience principled ethical orga-
nizational climates will feel a sense of certainty
and guidance provided by the organizational envi-
ronment. The principled climate guides managers’
actions when they seek to attain AL. For exam-
ple, managers can draw on codes of conduct when
faced with moral dilemmas and struggling to make
the right decision (Lemoine, Hartnell and Leroy,
2019). Thus, in line with COR theory’s principle of
resource investment, we propose that managers in
principled ethical organizational climates are likely
to invest these personal resources towards AL:
H2b: A principled ethical organizational cli-
mate relates positively to authentic leadership.
Study 1
Study 1 analyses personal resources in the form
of positive psychological capacities (H1) and
Academy of Management.

Managers’ Resources for Authentic Leadership
contextual resources in the form of benevolent
and principled ethical organizational climates
(H2a, H2b) in relation to managers’ daily AL.
Method
Sample and procedure. We recruited 134
German-speaking managers through Bilendi,
a professional research panel. Bilendi complies
with quality norms for online research by multiple
European research associations. Managers first
completed a general survey that assessed general
levels of AL, positive psychological capacities,
positive affect, perceptions of their organizations’
benevolent and principled ethical organizational
climates, and demographic information. From
the following Monday onwards, managers were
invited to respond to two daily surveys over 10
consecutive working days. The morning survey
sent at 6 a.m. to be filled in before work assessed
day-level positive psychological capacities and
positive affect. The afternoon survey sent at 4 p.m.
to be filled in after work assessed day-level AL.
Participation was incentivized (€5.60 for the
general survey and €1.17 per daily survey).
To assess data quality, we used a self-report
item of participants’ levels of attentiveness. Single
surveys were excluded when participants reported
‘very low’ or ‘low’ levels of attentiveness (i.e.
ratings of 1 or 2 on a five-point scale; DeSimone,
Harms and DeSimone, 2015). Forty-five managers
were excluded from subsequent analyses as they
provided less than three pairs of morning and
afternoon surveys. Of the remaining 89 managers,
65.17% were male with a mean age of 42.08 years
(SD = 9.64). They comprised team managers
(34.83%), department managers (32.58%), divi-
sional managers (25.84%) or senior executives
(6.74%). Their average management experience
was 10.15 years (SD = 8.08). The number of
direct reports ranged from 2 to 72 (M = 18.82,
SD = 17.33). They worked in different sec-
tors, such as manufacturing (23.60%), finance
(19.10%), communications (12.40%) and health
services (11.20%).
Managers in the final sample completed 552
paired morning and afternoon surveys on the
same day, and 63% of managers provided at least
six pairs of valid data (i.e. completed morning and
afternoon surveys at least 6 out of 10 days). In
addition, managers completed 155 morning and
102 afternoon surveys (i.e. one but not the other).

C2020 The Authors. British Journal of Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British
Academy of Management.
14678551, 2020, 2, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8551.12396 by Quaid-I-Azam University, Wiley Online Library on [11/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
331
The average response time was 1.5 minutes for the
morning survey and 2 minutes for the afternoon
survey. The average time between the comple-
tion of the morning and afternoon surveys was
10 hours and 20 minutes.
Measures.
Positive psychological capacities. We assessed
positive psychological capacities with six items
from Xanthopoulou et al. (2009) in the general
survey (α = 0.82) and the 10 morning surveys
(average α = 0.89) with two items each for self-
efficacy (e.g. ‘When I think about work today, I feel
I could deal efficiently with unexpected events’),
self-esteem (e.g. ‘When I think about work today,
I feel valuable’) and optimism (e.g. ‘When I think
about work today, I feel very optimistic about my
future’). Participants responded on a five-point
scale from 1 = does not apply at all to 5 = fully
applies.
Benevolent ethical organizational climate. We
assessed benevolent ethical organizational climate
with four items (α = 0.85) from Victor and Cullen
(1988). An example item is: ‘The most important
concern is the good of all people in the company’.
Participants responded on a five-point scale from
1 = does not apply at all to 5 = fully applies.
Principled ethical organizational climate. We
assessed principled ethical organizational climate
with four items (α = 0.66) from Victor and Cullen
(1988). An example item is: ‘In this company, peo-
ple are expected to strictly follow legal or pro-
fessional standards’. Participants responded on a
five-point scale from 1 = does not apply at all to
5 = fully applies.
Authentic leadership. In the general survey,
we assessed managers’ AL with 14 items (α = 0.85)
from the Authentic Leadership Inventory (ALI)
(Neider and Schriesheim, 2011; German trans-
lation by Hörner, Weisweiler and Braun, 2015).
Participants responded on a five-point scale from
1 = does not apply at all to 5 = fully applies. In the
afternoon surveys, we adapted eight items (aver-
age α = 0.86) for daily measurement. We selected
items with the highest factor loadings and contents
appropriate for day-level measurement (cf. Bolger,
Davis and Rafaeli, 2003; Gabriel et al., 2018). An
example item from the afternoon survey is: ‘Today,
I encouraged a work group member to voice an
opposing point of view (balanced processing)’.

332
Participants responded on a six-point frequency
scale from 1 = never to 6 = five or more times.
Control variables. The day of study was
recorded to control for time-based effects (Ohly
et al., 2010). As previous research has shown that
individuals feel more authentic when they are in a
positive mood (Lenton et al., 2013), we assessed
positive affect with five items from the Positive
and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) (Mackin-
non et al., 1999; German translation by Krohne,
Egloff and Kohlmann, 1996) in the general survey
(α = 0.86) and in each of the 10 morning surveys
(average α = 0.88). We controlled for day-level pos-
itive affect in the subsequent analysis.
Analytical strategy. Missing data is a common
phenomenon in experience sampling studies (Ohly
et al., 2010). While the data of the general sur-
vey was complete, the daily surveys showed miss-
ing values for 20.6% of positive psychological ca-
pacities as well as positive affect (i.e. 183 of 890
data points) and 26.3% of AL (i.e. 236 of 890 data
points). Recent multilevel research demonstrated
that multiple imputation is preferable over listwise
deletion (Grund, Lüdtke and Robitzsch, 2016,
2018). We applied a reversed multiple imputation
procedure for missing level-1 data with the mice
package (van Buuren and Groothuis-Oudshoorn,
2011), taking into account the multilevel structure
(Grund, Lüdtke and Robitzsch, 2018). Follow-
ing Graham, Olchowski and Gilreath (2007), 20
datasets were imputed. Results were pooled with
the mitml package (Grund, Robitzsch and Lüdtke,
2015).
We examined the factor structure of all items
with multilevel confirmatory factor analysis
(Muthén and Muthén, 2017; Zacher and Wilden,
2014). A model with three factors on the day
level (i.e. AL, positive affect and positive psy-
chological resources) and two factors on the
person level (i.e. benevolent and principled eth-
ical organizational climates) demonstrated an
acceptable fit: χ 2 (162) = 473.45, p < 0.001;
CFI = 0.930; TLI = 0.914; RMSEA = 0.046;
SRMRwithin = 0.059; SRMRbetween = 0.098.
In contrast, a one-factor model did not fit
the data well: χ 2 (172) = 2819.37, p < 0.001;
CFI = 0.407; TLI = 0.314; RMSEA = 0.132;
SRMRwithin = 0.163; SRMRbetween = 0.131.
We therefore deemed the theoretically assumed
measurement model appropriate for hypothesis
testing (χ 2 (10) = 2345.92, p < 0.001).

C 2020 The Authors. British Journal of Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British
14678551, 2020, 2, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8551.12396 by Quaid-I-Azam University, Wiley Online Library on [11/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
M. P. Fladerer and S. Braun
We used hierarchical linear modelling to test
the research model as daily observations (level 1)
were nested within persons (level 2). We centred the
level-1 predictor variables – positive psychological
capacities and positive affect – at the person’s mean
across days to control between-person confounds
(group-mean centring). Level-2 variables – benevo-
lent and principled ethical organizational climates
– were standardized and grand-mean centred for
interpretation (i.e. relative to the sample average;
Ohly et al., 2010). We ran the analysis using the
lme4 package (Bates et al., 2015) in R (R Core
Team, 2017).
Results
Within-person variance of day-level variables. We
first determined the proportion of variance in the
day-level variables by calculating intra-class corre-
lations (ICC(1)). The proportion of within-person
variation was 38% for positive psychological ca-
pacities, 52% for positive affect and 37% for AL.
This finding provides strong evidence for day-to-
day fluctuations of AL, positive psychological ca-
pacities and positive affect.
Descriptive statistics and correlations. Table 1 dis-
plays means, standard deviations and zero-order
correlations of the study variables at the person
level (rbg , above the diagonal) and the day level
(rwg , below the diagonal).
Hypotheses testing. Table 2 summarizes the hier-
archical linear modelling results. The control vari-
able day-level positive affect was not significantly
related to day-level AL (γ 10 = 0.04, SE = 0.07,
p = 0.270). Day-level positive psychological capac-
ities related significantly positively to day-level AL
(γ 20 = 0.17, SE = 0.09, p = 0.034). Managers re-
ported more AL on days with higher levels of posi-
tive psychological capacities. Thus, data supported
H1.
The relationship between managers’ perceptions
of benevolent ethical organizational climates and
AL was not significant (γ 01 = 0.01, SE = 0.08,
p = 0.453). Thus, data did not support H2a. How-
ever, managers’ perceptions of principled ethical
organizational climates displayed a significant pos-
itive relationship with AL (γ 02 = 0.17, SE = 0.08,
p = 0.023). Thus, data supported H2b.1
1
We tested a moderation model for exploratory purposes.
Neither benevolent nor principled ethical organizational
Academy of Management.
 14678551, 2020, 2, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8551.12396 by Quaid-I-Azam University, Wiley Online Library on [11/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Managers’ Resources for Authentic Leadership 333

Table 1. Study 1: within- and between-person descriptive statistics and correlations

Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 Day-level positive psychological capacities 3.66 0.75 – 0.62*** 0.35** 0.61*** 0.38*** 0.44*** 0.36*** 0.39***
2 Day-level positive affect 3.09 0.81 0.59*** – 0.33** 0.38*** 0.38*** 0.37*** 0.24* 0.06
3 Day-level authentic leadership 3.45 1.04 0.05 0.06 – 0.20 0.13 0.33** 0.09 0.22*
4 General positive psychological capacities 3.98 0.54 0.61*** 0.38*** 0.20 – 0.57*** 0.49*** 0.34** 0.32**
5 General positive affect 3.76 0.67 0.38*** 0.38*** 0.13 0.57*** – 0.43*** 0.29** 0.16
6 General authentic leadership 4.03 0.43 0.44*** 0.37*** 0.33** 0.49*** 0.43*** – 0.31** 0.36***
7 Benevolent ethical organizational climate 3.28 0.82 0.36*** 0.24* 0.09 0.34* 0.29** 0.31** – 0.34**
8 Principled ethical organizational climate 4.06 0.56 0.39*** 0.06 0.22* 0.32* 0.16 0.36** 0.34** –
9 Study day 5.50 0.00 −0.03 0.01 0.06 – – – – –

Note: Variables 1 to 3 and 10 are day-level variables (level 1) and variables 4 to 8 are person-level variables (level 2). Study day is a
monotonic variable representing the day of the study (ranging from 1 to 10). Day-level positive psychological capacities and day-level
positive affect were assessed in the morning. Day-level authentic leadership was assessed in the afternoon. Within-person correlations
(rwg ) are shown below the diagonal and are based on raw within-person scores (n = 552 days); between-person correlations (rbg ) are
shown above the diagonal and are based on raw between-person scores (N = 89 persons). Correlations for between-person variables
are based on between-person scores. All means (M) and standard deviations (SD) are based on between-person scores. *p < 0.05, **p
< 0.01, ***p < 0.001 (two-tailed).

Table 2. Study 1: results for research model predicting day-level authentic leadership

Variable Estimates SE t p

Intercept (γ 00 ) 3.44 0.08 45.02 <0.001

Level-1 predictors
Day-level positive affect (γ 10 ) 0.04 0.07 0.62 0.270
Day-level positive psychological capacities (γ 20 ) 0.17 0.09 1.86 0.034
Level-2 predictors
Benevolent ethical organizational climate (γ 01 ) 0.01 0.08 0.12 0.453
Principled ethical organizational climate (γ 02 ) 0.17 0.08 2.00 0.023
σ 2 (level-1 variance) 0.42
τ 2 (level-2 variance) 0.64

Note: Pooled estimates of 20 imputed datasets. Sample size after imputation: level 1, n = 890 days; level 2, N = 89 persons. Hypotheses
tests are one-tailed. Level-1 predictor is group-mean centred. Level-2 variables are standardized and grand-mean centred.

Discussion during the day. This finding confirms the resource

investment principle of COR theory that individ-
Theory suggests that AL is dynamic (Luthans and
uals with more resources are better positioned for
Avolio, 2003) as it depends on how managers be-
resource gains (Halbesleben et al., 2014), that is,
have ‘every day, in each and every interaction’
managers invested positive psychological capaci-
(May et al., 2003, p. 248). In this first study, the
ties towards AL on a given day.
fluctuations in managers’ AL found over 10 days
We tested benevolent and principled ethical or-
were substantive. This finding has implications
ganizational climates as contextual resources for
for the development of theoretical models of AL
managers’ AL, focusing on ethical dimensions of
(e.g. to include day-level outcomes for managers
the organizational context (Lemoine, Hartnell and
and employees) and its measurement (e.g. day-level
Leroy, 2019). Only principled but not benevolent
self- and other-ratings) in future research (Fischer,
ethical organizational climates were related to AL.
Dietz and Antonakis, 2017; McClean et al., 2019;
This finding contributes to the idea of resource car-
McCormick et al., 2018; Shamir, 2011). We also
avans, pointing to kinds of contextual resources
saw that when managers experienced high levels of
which foster managers’ engagement in AL (i.e.
positive psychological capacities in the morning,
when managers indicated that their work environ-
they reported a higher frequency of AL displayed
ments provided them with clear ethical guidelines
(May et al., 2003). We conclude that structures
climates interacted with positive psychological capacities
(e.g. codes of conduct) facilitate managers’ sense
to predict AL. Detailed results are available from the first
author upon request. of organizational support for moral behaviour


C2020 The Authors. British Journal of Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British
Academy of Management.

334
(van Prooijen and Ellemers, 2015), whereas caring
norms may partly conflict with AL such as trans-
parency and open, critical feedback (Hewlin, Du-
mas and Burnett, 2017).
Study 2
In extension of Study 1, Study 2 addresses the
role of managers’ promotion focus as a mediating
mechanism linking managers’ positive psycho-
logical capacities to AL. Our reasoning builds
on COR theory and research relating positive
psychological capacities to promotion focus (e.g.
Halbesleben et al., 2014) as well as theorizing and
research in the tradition of Higgins’ (1997) self-
regulatory focus theory to suggest that promotion
focus is a predictor of positive forms of leadership
(Johnson et al., 2017; Kark and van Dijk, 2019;
Sassenberg and Hamstra, 2017; Tuncdogan, van
den Bosch and Volberda, 2015). In addition, Study
2 serves as a constructive replication of the previ-
ous findings regarding the relationships of positive
psychological capacities and ethical organiza-
tional climates with AL (Eden, 2002; Miller and
Bamberger, 2016).
Promotion focus as linking mechanism
Regulatory focus theory suggests that people’s be-
haviour is motivated by two fundamental moti-
vational orientations: promotion and prevention
(Brockner and Higgins, 2001; Higgins, 1997). A
promotion focus describes a self-regulatory strat-
egy that is attuned to individuals’ ideals, hopes and
aspirations (Brockner and Higgins, 2001; Higgins,
1997). It motivates individuals ‘to bring their ac-
tual selves (their behaviors and self-conceptions)
in alignment with their ideal selves (self-standards
based on wishes and aspirations of how they would
like to be)’ (Brockner and Higgins, 2001, p. 35). In
contrast, a prevention focus implies goals in accor-
dance with ought selves, that is, one’s felt duties
and responsibilities (Brockner and Higgins, 2001).
In line with Higgins’ (1997) theorizing, ‘preven-
tion focus and promotion focus are independent
but not mutually exclusive constructs’ (Neu-
bert, Wu and Roberts, 2013, p. 289) – that is,
they coexist as separate dimensions rather than
opposite ends of the same spectrum. Recent
meta-analytical findings largely affirm this rea-
soning (Gorman et al., 2012; Lanaj, Chang and

C 2020 The Authors. British Journal of Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British
14678551, 2020, 2, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8551.12396 by Quaid-I-Azam University, Wiley Online Library on [11/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
M. P. Fladerer and S. Braun
Johnson, 2012). Although both foci coexist, they
are activated by (largely) different antecedents and
relate differently to subsequent outcomes. Recent
leadership research concentrates on managers’
promotion focus, demonstrating that it facilitates
desirable leadership behaviours as well as follower
outcomes (Kark and van Dijk, 2019; Sassenberg
and Hamstra, 2017). In addition, research by Kim
et al. (2019) suggests that people’s promotion
focus, but not prevention focus, predicts the
subjective experience of authenticity. In line with
these arguments as well as meta-analytical find-
ings that a prevention focus is unrelated – in the
case of self-efficacy and optimism – or negatively
related – in the case of self-esteem – to positive
psychological capacities (Gorman et al., 2012;
Lanaj, Chang and Johnson, 2012), we predict the
influence of positive psychological capacities on
managers’ promotion focus and subsequent AL.
The promotion focus is malleable and can be af-
fected by factors within the individual (Higgins,
1997, 2000), such as their level of personal re-
sources (Lanaj, Chang and Johnson, 2012), which
in turn facilitate positive appraisals of challenging
situations (Luthans and Youssef-Morgan, 2017;
Petersen and Youssef-Morgan, 2018). By fram-
ing challenging situations as opportunities, a pro-
motion focus allows managers to remain perse-
verant and to invest their resources to attain AL
(Hobfoll, 2001, 2011); that is, managers are more
likely to focus on self-improvement rather than
self-protection (Gardner et al., 2005). In con-
trast, when managers lack personal resources, self-
protection and the avoidance of challenges are
triggered (e.g. Heimpel, Elliot and Wood, 2006).
Therefore, in line with COR theorizing (specifi-
cally, Corollaries 1, 3 and 4; Halbesleben et al.,
2014), we expect that low levels of positive psy-
chological capacities will attenuate managers’ pro-
motion focus, while high levels will facilitate it.
Two meta-analyses support this argument: Gor-
man et al. (2012) found positive relationships of
self-esteem and optimism with promotion focus,
and Lanaj, Chang and Johnson (2012) demon-
strated its positive associations with self-esteem
and self-efficacy.
Promotion-focused managers are fuelled by the
motivation to achieve their ideal selves (Christian,
Garza and Slaughter, 2011). We therefore expect
that managers’ promotion focus facilitates AL be-
cause it motivates them to align the ideal inner self
with one’s outer self. A promotion focus enables
Academy of Management.

Managers’ Resources for Authentic Leadership
greater resilience in the light of obstacles and
setbacks that would otherwise prevent managers
from achieving the ideal ‘authentic self’ (Brockner
and Higgins, 2001; Kark and van Dijk, 2007; Neu-
bert et al., 2008). Specifically, it helps managers
achieve higher levels of self-awareness by reflecting
on discrepancies between their actual and ideal
selves while maintaining a growth orientation
(Kark and van Dijk, 2007). Promotion-focused
managers are more likely to take risks to attain
their ideals and follow their personal beliefs
(Brockner and Higgins, 2001), consistent with an
internalized moral perspective. A promotion focus
enables them to explore alternative routes before
reaching decisions (Tuncdogan, van den Bosch
and Volberda, 2015), to listen to multiple perspec-
tives and be open to new information (Kark and
van Dijk, 2007). In sum, we suggest that managers
who draw on their positive psychological capac-
ities are more likely to self-regulate towards their
ideal selves, which in turn facilitates AL:
H3: Managers’ positive psychological capacities
have an indirect effect on authentic leadership
through managers’ promotion focus.
Methods and results
Sample and procedure. We surveyed 230
German-speaking managers recruited via the
ISO-certified panel provider respondi at two
points in time with a time lag of 10 days to reduce
method bias (Podsakoff, MacKenzie and Pod-
sakoff, 2012). The first questionnaire (t1 ) assessed
positive psychological capacities, positive affect,
perceptions of benevolent and principled ethical
organizational climates, and demographic infor-
mation. The second questionnaire (t2 ) assessed
promotion focus and AL.
A total of 148 (64.35%) managers responded
to the survey at both time points. We excluded
18 managers who reported low levels of attentive-
ness (i.e. ratings of 1 or 2 on a five-point scale)
(DeSimone and Harms, 2018; DeSimone, Harms
and DeSimone, 2015).2 All subsequent analyses
2
Following the recommendations by DeSimone and
Harms (2018), we analysed the results with and without
data screening. The 18 excluded cases did not differ in
their demographics from the remaining sample. Of the
variables included in our model, only benevolent ethical
work climate differed significantly between the excluded
(M = 2.82, SD = 0.75) and included cases (M = 3.26, SD

C2020 The Authors. British Journal of Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British
Academy of Management.
14678551, 2020, 2, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8551.12396 by Quaid-I-Azam University, Wiley Online Library on [11/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
335
were based on the responses collected from 130
managers. 56.92% of participants were male and
their average age was 43.75 years (SD = 10.48).
Participants worked as team managers (31.54%),
department managers (36.15%), divisional man-
agers (18.46%) or senior executives (13.85%). They
had an average management experience of 11.58
years (SD = 8.70). The number of direct reports
ranged from 1 to 97 (M = 15.77, SD = 15.99).
They worked in different sectors, such as manufac-
turing (19.23%), finance (16.92%), public admin-
istration (10.77%), communications (10.00%) and
health services (7.69%).
Measures. We used the same scales as in the
general survey of Study 1 for positive psycholog-
ical capacities (α = 0.88; Xanthopoulou et al.,
2009), benevolent ethical organizational climate
(α = 0.85) and principled ethical organizational
climate (α = 0.82; Victor and Cullen, 1988), AL
(α = 0.92; Neider and Schriesheim, 2011; Ger-
man translation by Hörner, Weisweiler and Braun,
2015) and positive affect (α = 0.90; Mackinnon
et al., 1999; German translation by Krohne, Egloff
and Kohlmann, 1996). We assessed work promo-
tion focus with nine items (α = 0.91; Neubert et al.,
2008), translated into German following a stan-
dard procedure (Brislin, 1980). An example item
is: ‘At work, I am motivated by my hopes and as-
pirations’. Participants responded on a five-point
scale from 1 = does not apply at all to 5 = fully
applies. The measure of positive affect was used to
control for inter-individual differences that may af-
fect promotion focus (Neubert et al., 2008) and AL
(Lenton et al., 2013).
Descriptive statistics, correlations and analytical
strategy. Table 3 displays descriptive statistics of
the study variables.
We used confirmatory factor analysis imple-
mented in the lavaan package (Rosseel, 2012) in
R (R Core Team, 2017) to test the latent fac-
tor structure of AL, personal resources and the
full measurement model in four steps. First, we
tested the higher-order factor structure of the
ALI (Credé and Harms, 2015), which pointed
to the appropriateness of conceptualizing AL as
= 0.85, t(146) = −2.086, p = 0.039, Cohen’s d = 0.549).
An analysis of the full sample, including all 148 managers,
yielded the same results when testing our hypotheses. De-
tailed results are available from the first author upon re-
quest.

336
Table 3. Study 2: descriptive statistics and correlations
Variable M SD
1 Positive psychological capacities1 4.12 0.61
2 Benevolent ethical organizational climate1 3.36 0.82
3 Principled ethical organizational climate1 3.99 0.74
4 Positive affect1 3.82 0.72
5 Promotion focus2 3.48 0.77
6 Authentic leadership2 3.98 0.53
Note: N = 130. Subscripts indicate point of measurement. Internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) in parentheses on the diagonal.
*p < 0.05, *p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001 (two-tailed).
a higher-order factor with four first-order fac-
tors (χ 2 (73) = 149.02, p < 0.001; CFI = 0.911;
TLI = 0.889; RMSEA = 0.091 (0.070, 0.111);
SRMR = 0.056) (cf. Braun and Nieberle, 2017;
Neider and Schriesheim, 2011; Steffens et al.,
2016). Detailed results are available from online
supplement S1.
Second, we tested the factor structure of our
positive psychological capabilities measure in line
with the theoretical structure proposed by Xan-
thopoulou et al. (2007). We compared a higher-
order factor of positive psychological capacities
with three first-order factors (i.e. self-efficacy, self-
esteem and optimism) (χ 2 (6) = 21.14, p = 0.002;
CFI = 0.962; TLI = 0.904; RMSEA = 0.139
(90% CI: 0.078, 0.206); SRMR = 0.026) to a
single-factor model (i.e. all indicators loading
on one positive psychological capabilities factor)
(χ 2 (3) = 26.836, p < 0.001) and an orthogonal,
first-order model (i.e. three uncorrelated latent fac-
tors with indicators loading on their respective fac-
tor) (χ 2 (3) = 158.395, p < 0.001). Detailed re-
sults are available from online supplement S2. In
line with these results, demonstrating the best fit
for the theoretically proposed higher-order factor
model, we used positive psychological capacities as
a higher-order factor with three first-order factors
in the analysis.
Third, we tested the full measurement model
underlying this study. The hypothesized model
with six factors (i.e. positive psychological
capacities, positive affect, promotion focus,
benevolent and principled ethical organiza-
tional climate, and AL) showed an acceptable
fit (χ 2 (794) = 1189.10, p < 0.001; CFI = 0.886;
TLI = 0.876; RMSEA = 0.062 (90% CI: 0.054,
0.069); SRMR = 0.068) and fitted the data sig-
nificantly better (χ 2 (25) = 1191.06, p < 0.001)
than a one-factor model (χ 2 (819) = 2380.16,
p < 0.001; CFI = 0.548; TLI = 0.525; RM-

C 2020 The Authors. British Journal of Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British
14678551, 2020, 2, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8551.12396 by Quaid-I-Azam University, Wiley Online Library on [11/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
M. P. Fladerer and S. Braun
1 2 3 4 5 6
(0.88)
0.46*** (0.85)
0.35*** 0.46*** (0.82)
0.57*** 0.60*** 0.42*** (0.90)
0.48** 0.41*** 0.08 0.48*** (0.91)
0.64** 0.50*** 0.43*** 0.60*** 0.51*** (0.92)
SEA = 0.121 (90% CI: 0.115, 0.127); SRMR =
0.109).
Finally, for hypotheses testing, we applied latent
structural equation modelling with bootstrapping
to determine 95% confidence intervals for each pa-
rameter (Kline, 2015).
Hypotheses testing. Table 4 provides the effect es-
timates of the hypothesized structural model.
Positive psychological capacities were positively
related to AL (β = 0.369, SE = 0.140, p = 0.002),
supporting H1. Only principled ethical organi-
zational climate displayed a significant positive
relationship with AL (β = 0.232, SE = 0.072,
p = 0.008). For benevolent ethical organiza-
tional climate, the relationship was not significant
(β = 0.008, SE = 0.096, p = 0.946). Thus, parallel
to Study 1, data supported H2b but not H2a.
In addition, H3 proposed an indirect effect of
managers’ positive psychological capacities on AL
through managers’ promotion focus. Positive psy-
chological capacities were positively related to pro-
motion focus (β = 0.422, SE = 0.160, p = 0.002),
which in turn related positively to AL (β = 0.291,
SE = 0.109, p = 0.007). The indirect effect was sig-
nificant (β = 0.123, SE = 0.063, p = 0.023). Thus,
data supported H3.3
3
For exploratory purposes (cf. To et al., 2018), we also
assessed managers’ work prevention focus (Neubert et al.,
2008; nine items, α = 0.92). As in previous studies (e.g.
Neubert, Wu and Roberts, 2013; Neubert et al., 2008),
prevention and promotion focus were positively corre-
lated (r = 0.354, p < 0.001). However, when testing the
proposed structural model with prevention focus as medi-
ating variable, the relationship of positive psychological
capacities with prevention focus was non-significant (β =
0.237, SE = 0.224, p = 0.091) and so was the indirect ef-
fect (β = 0.063, SE = 0.046, p = 0.114).
Academy of Management.
 14678551, 2020, 2, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8551.12396 by Quaid-I-Azam University, Wiley Online Library on [11/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Managers’ Resources for Authentic Leadership 337

Table 4. Study 2: effect estimates of structural model

Structural paths B [95% CI] β SE CR p

Positive psychological capacities1 → Promotion focus2 0.490 [0.177, 0.804] 0.422 0.16 3.06 0.002
Positive psychological capacities1 → Authentic leadership2 0.432 [0.158, 0.707] 0.369 0.14 3.09 0.002
Benevolent ethical organizational climate1 → Authentic leadership2 0.007 [−0.182, 0.195] 0.008 0.10 0.07 0.946
Principled ethical organizational climate1 → Authentic leadership2 0.190 [0.049, 0.331] 0.232 0.07 2.64 0.008
Positive affect1 → Promotion focus2 0.253 [0.060, 0.446] 0.319 0.10 2.57 0.010
Positive affect1 → Authentic leadership2 0.093 [−0.094, 0.279] 0.116 0.10 0.98 0.329
Promotion focus2 → Authentic leadership2 0.293 [0.080, 0.507] 0.291 0.11 2.69 0.007
Positive psychological capacities1 → Promotion focus2 → Authentic leadership2 0.144 [0.020, 0.268] 0.123 0.06 2.27 0.023

Note: Subscripts indicate point of measurement. 95% CI = 95% confidence intervals; B = unstandardized coefficients; CR = critical
ratio; SE = standard error; β = standardized coefficients. Global fit indices: χ 2 (796) = 1198.34, p < 0.001, CFI = 0.883, TLI = 0.874,
RMSEA = 0.062 [90% CI = 0.055, 0.069], SRMR = 0.071.

Discussion focus, and replicated that only a principled ethical

Study 2 supported and extended our previous find-
ings. Pointing to homologous effects on within-
and between-person levels (Chen, Blieses and
Mathieu, 2005; McCormick et al., 2018), man-
agers with higher levels of positive psychologi-
cal capacities reported more AL. Managers’ pro-
motion focus was an underlying mediator of
this relationship (Brockner and Higgins, 2001;
Halbesleben et al., 2014). The findings help to
better understand reasons why personal resources
facilitate managers’ AL from the perspective of
COR theory. Positive psychological capacities are
resources through which managers can invest in
self-regulation processes towards growth, aspira-
tions and ideals to then attain AL (Halbesleben
et al., 2014; Hobfoll et al., 2018; Kark and van
Dijk, 2007). Results also replicated findings from
Study 1 for ethical organizational climates, con-
firming that managers draw from ethical guidelines
and codes of conduct for AL (Lemoine, Hartnell
and Leroy, 2019; May et al., 2003), while norms of
care and consideration appear less relevant.
General discussion
The present research advances current theorizing
of AL in light of COR theory. In Study 1, AL var-
ied from day to day, and these fluctuations were
significantly predicted by managers’ personal re-
sources (i.e. self-esteem, self-efficacy, optimism) on
a given day. Results also provided initial results to
suggest that only principled, but not benevolent
ethical organizational climates represent a stable,
contextual resource for AL. Study 2 extended these
initial results, showing an indirect relationship be-
tween personal resources and AL via promotion
organizational climate positively predicted AL.
Taken together, findings from the two studies
make three key contributions to the management
literature. First, we demonstrated that AL varies
from day to day, and that these changes were
contingent on fluctuations in levels of personal
resources. This is a genuinely new insight for AL;
aligning with suggestions that incorporating time-
based theorizing and within-person variation in
measurement approaches advances management
research (Kelemen, Matthews and Breevaart,
2019; McClean et al., 2019; McCormick et al.,
2018).
Moreover, we contribute to the understand-
ing of some of the underlying processes linking
personal resources to AL, which is a crucial
albeit largely untested element of AL theory
(Gardner et al., 2005; Luthans and Avolio, 2003;
Sparrowe, 2005). We show that managers with
higher levels of personal resources are more likely
to regulate behaviour towards their ideal selves
(i.e. promotion focus; Kark and van Dijk, 2019).
Focusing on personal hopes and aspirations
enables managers to accumulate further resources
(Halbesleben et al., 2014). We thus found evidence
of a ‘gain spiral’ for AL, as described in COR
theory (Hobfoll, 2001, 2011).
Our work also speaks to the importance of
virtue ethics for AL (Lemoine, Hartnell and
Leroy, 2019), positioning them as part of a re-
source caravan from the perspective of COR
theory (Hobfoll et al., 2018). Principled ethical or-
ganizational climates incorporate moral reference
points to establish ethical guidelines and standards
in organizations (Victor and Cullen, 1988). Inter-
estingly, managers’ perceptions of a benevolent
ethical organizational climate were not related


C2020 The Authors. British Journal of Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British
Academy of Management.

338
to AL across the two studies. Benevolent ethical
organizational climates attune employees to the
good of individuals within the organization and
the collective as the basis for ethical judgements
(Kish-Gephart, Harrison and Treviño, 2010; Mar-
tin and Cullen, 2006). Focusing on what is ‘good
for us’ as opposed to what is ‘the right thing to do’
may create moral tensions for managers who seek
to attain AL (Hewlin, Dumas and Burnett, 2017;
Koerner, 2014). AL differs from other positive
leadership styles by being ‘a markedly distinct
theoretical approach to normative morality’
(Lemoine, Hartnell and Leroy, 2019, p. 159).
Compared to being a servant leader, for example,
AL is less focused on caring for others and more
about acting on the basis of one’s personal values
(Lemoine, Hartnell and Leroy, 2019).
Limitations and directions for future research
The research presented here has limitations, which
need to be considered when interpreting the re-
sults. We adapted an eight-item version of the ALI
(Neider and Schriesheim, 2011) to measure AL
as a day-level construct which captured significant
variations across days (37% within-person vari-
ance). A positive correlation between the ALI (i.e.
measuring AL as a relatively stable inter-individual
difference factor) and the day-level measure
(r = 0.33, p < 0.01) was observed. While we found
initial evidence for the validity of the day-level
measure (Gabriel et al., 2018; Ohly et al., 2010), fu-
ture research should refine and validate it further.
Self-reports were an appropriate data source for
personal resources and AL (Hewlin, Dumas and
Burnett, 2017; Weiss et al., 2018). Weiss et al.
(2018) pointed out that core aspects of AL, such
as the consistency of thoughts and behaviours,
cannot be evaluated by other persons (see also
Hewlin, Dumas and Burnett, 2017; Knoll et al.,
2015). Research found significant positive correla-
tions between leader and follower ratings of AL
(Nübold, van Quaquebeke and Hülsheger, 2019).
Also, the level of granularity (i.e. observing man-
agers’ behaviours on a specific day) in experi-
ence sampling studies puts the manager ‘in the
best position to evaluate her/his own behaviors’
(McClean et al., 2019, p. 493). The use of on-
line panels is common in organizational research
(Buhrmester, Kwang and Gosling, 2011; Peer et al.,
2017). Non-naivety among frequent participants
and self-selection into panels may pose threats to

C 2020 The Authors. British Journal of Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British
14678551, 2020, 2, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8551.12396 by Quaid-I-Azam University, Wiley Online Library on [11/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
M. P. Fladerer and S. Braun
the generalizability of results (Chandler, Mueller
and Paolacci, 2014). While this concern applies
to many forms of sampling (e.g. snowball or
network samples), we readily acknowledge this
limitation.
We took measures to address method biases
(Podsakoff, MacKenzie and Podsakoff, 2012).
Study 1 assessed the predictor and criterion vari-
ables across 10 days, and level-1 variables were
person-mean centred (Gabriel et al., 2018). In
Study 2, we separated predictor and criterion vari-
ables via two points of measurement. In both stud-
ies, we followed recommendations for data screen-
ing to enhance quality (DeSimone and Harms,
2018; DeSimone, Harms and DeSimone, 2015).
Future longitudinal research could study differ-
ent forms of dynamics in AL behaviour, such
as growth through interventions (Nübold, van
Quaquebeke and Hülsheger, 2019), and include
follower outcomes in response to short-term fluc-
tuations of AL (Gill and Caza, 2018) as well as
carry-over effects on following days.
Finally, we suggest for future work to incorpo-
rate other personal resources such as courage (May
et al., 2003). This could also include investigating
the interactions of different resources and how or-
ganizational culture in a broader sense affects these
processes (Hobfoll et al., 2018). We did not con-
ceptualize promotion focus as a mediator in the
relationship of organizational climate and AL on
the grounds that mediating processes are likely to
differ between personal and contextual resources.
For example, ethical work climates might facilitate
managers’ AL through heightened levels of moral
awareness (van Sandt, Shepard and Zappe, 2006)
or moral efficacy (May et al., 2003). However, this
is an issue for future research to resolve.
Practical implications
The research presented here has important im-
plications for management practice. Managers’
positive psychological capacities matter for AL,
not only generally, but also on a day-to-day basis.
Hence, organizations are called upon to foster
managers’ personal resources consistently. We
recommend that businesses introduce daily inter-
ventions (e.g. reflection exercises) to strengthen
managers’ positive psychological capacities
throughout the working week (Lanaj, Foulk and
Erez, 2019; Luthans et al., 2006).
Academy of Management.

Managers’ Resources for Authentic Leadership
The finding that promotion focus links positive
psychological capacities to AL suggests that in-
terventions targeting self-regulation towards ideal
selves will benefit managers’ AL. Promotion fo-
cus can be fostered through priming of gains and
positive behavioural role modelling (Kark and van
Dijk, 2007). Managers who act in line with their
ideal selves can also be role models for others in
the organization to speak up when they witness un-
ethical behaviour (Monzani, Braun and van Dick,
2016). The finding that principled ethical organi-
zational climates facilitate AL supports the role of
compliance management (Treviño et al., 1999). We
recommend that businesses reinforce ethical guide-
lines and standards through a consistent agenda
for internal stakeholders (Kish-Gephart, Harrison
and Treviño, 2010).
Conclusion
While AL is highly valued in today’s business
world, scholars and practitioners must acknowl-
edge that managers often struggle to act in line
with their authentic selves at work. Positive psy-
chological capacities and principled ethical organi-
zational climates are important resources to guide
managers on the path towards AL. We call for a
stronger integration of COR and leadership the-
ory, as well as studies of the day-to-day dynamics
that managers experience.
References
Alvesson, M. and K. Einola (2019). ‘Warning for excessive posi-
tivity: authentic leadership and other traps in leadership stud-
ies’, The Leadership Quarterly, 30, pp. 383–395.
Avolio, B. J. and W. L. Gardner (2005). ‘Authentic leadership de-
velopment: getting to the root of positive forms of leadership’,
The Leadership Quarterly, 16, pp. 315–338.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New
York: Freeman.
Bandura, A., G. V. Caprara, C. Barbaranelli, M. Gerbino and
C. Pastorelli (2003). ‘Role of affective self-regulatory efficacy
in diverse spheres of psychosocial functioning’, Child Develop-
ment, 74, pp. 769–782.
Banks, G. C., K. D. McCauley, W. L. Gardner and C. E. Guler
(2016). ‘A meta-analytic review of authentic and transforma-
tional leadership: a test for redundancy’, The Leadership Quar-
terly, 27, pp. 634–652.
Barnett, T. and C. Vaicys (2000). ‘The moderating effect of in-
dividuals’ perceptions of ethical work climate on ethical judg-
ments and behavioral intentions’, Journal of Business Ethics,
27, pp. 351–362.

C2020 The Authors. British Journal of Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British
Academy of Management.
14678551, 2020, 2, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8551.12396 by Quaid-I-Azam University, Wiley Online Library on [11/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
339
Barraquier, A. (2011). ‘Ethical behaviour in practice: decision
outcomes and strategic implications’, British Journal of Man-
agement, 22, pp. S28-S46.
Bates, D., M. Mächler, B. Bolker and S. Walker (2015). ‘Fitting
linear mixed-effects models using lme4’, Journal of Statistical
Software, 67, pp. 1–48.
Bolger, N., A. Davis and E. Rafaeli (2003). ‘Diary methods: cap-
turing life as it is lived’, Annual Review of Psychology, 54,
pp. 579–616.
Braun, S. and K. W. A. M. Nieberle (2017). ‘Authentic leadership
extends beyond work: a multilevel model of work–family con-
flict and enrichment’, The Leadership Quarterly, 28, pp. 780–
797.
Breevaart, K., A. Bakker, J. Hetland, E. Demerouti, O. K. Olsen
and R. Espevik (2014). ‘Daily transactional and transforma-
tional leadership and daily employee engagement’, Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 87, pp. 138–157.
Brislin, R. W. (1980). ‘Translation and content analysis of oral
and written material’. In H. C. Triandis and J. W. Berry (eds),
Handbook of Cross-Cultural Psychology, Vol. 1, pp. 389–444.
Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Brockner, J. and E. T. Higgins (2001). ‘Regulatory focus theory:
implications for the study of emotions at work’, Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86, pp. 35–66.
Buhrmester, M., T. Kwang and S. D. Gosling (2011). ‘Ama-
zon’s Mechanical Turk: a new source of inexpensive, yet
high-quality, data?’, Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6,
pp. 3–5.
Byrne, A., A. M. Dionisi, J. Barling, A. Akers, J. Robertson, R.
Lys et al. (2014). ‘The depleted leader: the influence of leaders’
diminished psychological resources on leadership behaviors’,
The Leadership Quarterly, 25, pp. 344–357.
Chandler, J., P. Mueller and G. Paolacci (2014). ‘Nonnaı̈veté
among Amazon Mechanical Turk workers: consequences and
solutions for behavioral researchers’, Behavior Research Meth-
ods, 46, pp. 112–130.
Chen, G., P. D. Bliese and J. E. Mathieu (2005). ‘Conceptual
framework and statistical procedures for delineating and test-
ing multilevel theories of homology’, Organizational Research
Methods, 8, pp. 375–409.
Christian, M. S., A. S. Garza and J. E. Slaughter (2011). ‘Work
engagement: a quantitative review and test of its relations with
task and contextual performance’, Personnel Psychology, 64,
pp. 89–136.
Cooper, C. D., T. A. Scandura and C. A. Schriesheim (2005).
‘Looking forward but learning from our past: potential chal-
lenges to developing authentic leadership theory and authentic
leaders’, The Leadership Quarterly, 16, pp. 475–493.
Credé, M. and P. D. Harms (2015). ‘25 years of higher-order con-
firmatory factor analysis in the organizational sciences: a crit-
ical review and development of reporting recommendations’,
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36, pp. 845–872.
DeSimone, J. A. and P. D. Harms (2018). ‘Dirty data: the effects
of screening respondents who provide low-quality data in sur-
vey research’, Journal of Business and Psychology, 33, pp. 559–
577.
DeSimone, J. A., P. D. Harms and A. J. DeSimone (2015). ‘Best
practice recommendations for data screening’, Journal of Or-
ganizational Behavior, 36, pp. 171–181.
Eagly, A. H. (2005). ‘Achieving relational authenticity in lead-
ership: does gender matter?’, The Leadership Quarterly, 16,
pp. 459–474.

340
Eden, D. (2002). ‘From the Editors: replication, meta-analysis,
scientific progress, and AMJ’s publication policy’, Academy of
Management Journal, 45, pp. 841–846.
Fischer, T., J. Dietz and J. Antonakis (2017). ‘Leadership process
models: a review and synthesis’, Journal of Management, 43,
pp. 1726–1753.
Gabriel, A. S., N. P. Podsakoff, D. J. Beal, B. A. Scott, S. Son-
nentag, J. P. Trougakos and M. M. Butts (2018). ‘Experience
sampling methods: a discussion of critical trends and consid-
erations for scholarly advancement’, Organizational Research
Methods, 22, pp. 969–1006.
Gardner, W. L., B. J. Avolio, F. Luthans, D. R. May and F.
O. Walumbwa (2005). ‘“Can you see the real me?”: a self-
based model of authentic leader and follower development’,
The Leadership Quarterly, 16, pp. 343–372.
Gardner, W. L., C. C. Cogliser, K. M. Davis and M. P.
Dickens (2011). ‘Authentic leadership: a review of the liter-
ature and research agenda’, The Leadership Quarterly, 22,
pp. 1120–1145.
George, B. (2007). True North: Discover Your Authentic Leader-
ship. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Gill, C. and A. Caza (2018). ‘An investigation of authentic leader-
ship’s individual and group influences on follower responses’,
Journal of Management, 44, pp. 530–554.
Gorman, C. A., J. P. Meriac, B. L. Overstreet, S. Apodaca, A. L.
McIntyre, P. Park and J. N. Godbey (2012). ‘A meta-analysis
of the regulatory focus nomological network: work-related an-
tecedents and consequences’, Journal of Vocational Behavior,
80, pp. 160–172.
Graham, J. W., A. E. Olchowski and T. D. Gilreath (2007). ‘How
many imputations are really needed? Some practical clarifi-
cations of multiple imputation theory’, Prevention Science, 8,
pp. 206–213.
Grund, S., O. Lüdtke and A. Robitzsch (2016). ‘Multiple imputa-
tion of missing covariate values in multilevel models with ran-
dom slopes: a cautionary note’, Behavior Research Methods,
48, pp. 640–649.
Grund, S., O. Lüdtke and A. Robitzsch (2018). ‘Multiple impu-
tation of missing data for multilevel models’, Organizational
Research Methods, 21, pp. 111–149.
Grund, S., A. Robitzsch and O. Lüdtke (2015). mitml: tools for
multiple imputation in multilevel modeling.
Halbesleben, J. R. B. and A. R. Wheeler (2015). ‘To invest or
not? The role of coworker support and trust in daily reciprocal
gain spirals of helping behavior’, Journal of Management, 41,
pp. 1628–1650.
Halbesleben, J. R. B., J.-P. Neveu, S. C. Paustian-Underdahl and
M. Westman (2014). ‘Getting to the “COR”: understanding
the role of resources in conservation of resources theory’, Jour-
nal of Management, 40, pp. 1334–1364.
Heimpel, S. A., A. J. Elliot and J. V. Wood (2006). ‘Basic personal-
ity dispositions, self-esteem, and personal goals: an approach-
avoidance analysis’, Journal of Personality, 74, pp. 1293–
1320.
Hewlin, P. F., T. L. Dumas and M. F. Burnett (2017). ‘To thine
own self be true? Facades of conformity, values incongruence,
and the moderating impact of leader integrity’, Academy of
Management Journal, 60, pp. 178–199.
Higgins, E. T. (1997). ‘Beyond pleasure and pain’, American Psy-
chologist, 52, pp. 1280–1300.
Higgins, E. T. (2000). ‘Making a good decision: value from fit’,
American Psychologist, 55, pp. 1217–1230.

C 2020 The Authors. British Journal of Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British
14678551, 2020, 2, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8551.12396 by Quaid-I-Azam University, Wiley Online Library on [11/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
M. P. Fladerer and S. Braun
Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). ‘Conservation of resources: a new attempt
at conceptualizing stress’, American Psychologist, 44, pp. 513–
524.
Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). ‘The influence of culture, community, and
the nested-self in the stress process: advancing conservation of
resources theory’, Applied Psychology, 50, pp. 337–421.
Hobfoll, S. E. (2002). ‘Social and psychological resources and
adaptation’, Review of General Psychology, 6, pp. 307–324.
Hobfoll, S. E. (2011). ‘Conservation of resource caravans and
engaged settings’, Journal of Occupational and Organizational
Psychology, 84, pp. 116–122.
Hobfoll, S. E., J. Freedy, C. Lane and P. Geller (1990). ‘Con-
servation of social resources: social support resource the-
ory’, Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 7, pp. 465–
478.
Hobfoll, S. E., J. Halbesleben, J.-P. Neveu and M. Westman
(2018). ‘Conservation of resources in the organizational con-
text: the reality of resources and their consequences’, Annual
Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Be-
havior, 5, pp. 103–128.
Hoch, J. E., W. H. Bommer, J. H. Dulebohn and D. Wu (2018).
‘Do ethical, authentic, and servant leadership explain vari-
ance above and beyond transformational leadership? A meta-
analysis’, Journal of Management, 44, pp. 501–529.
Hörner, K. N., S. Weisweiler and S. Braun (2015). ‘Authentic
leadership and follower stress perception: model testing and
validation of the authentic leadership inventory’, Academy of
Management Proceedings, 2015, p. 10922.
Ibarra, H. (2015). ‘The authenticity paradox: why feeling like a
fake can be a sign of growth’, Harvard Business Review, Jan–
Feb, pp. 53–59.
Iszatt-White, M. and S. Kempster (2018). ‘Authentic leadership:
getting back to the roots of the “Root Construct”?’, Interna-
tional Journal of Management Reviews, 21, pp. 356–369.
Jensen, S. M. and F. Luthans (2006). ‘Relationship between en-
trepreneurs’ psychological capital and their authentic leader-
ship’, Journal of Managerial Issues, 18, pp. 254–273.
Johnson, R. E., M. Venus, K. Lanaj, C. Mao and C.-H. Chang
(2012). ‘Leader identity as an antecedent of the frequency
and consistency of transformational, consideration, and abu-
sive leadership behaviors’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 97,
pp. 1262–1272.
Johnson, R. E., D. D. King, S.-H. Lin, B. A. Scott, E. M. Jackson
Walker and M. Wang (2017). ‘Regulatory focus trickle-down:
how leader regulatory focus and behavior shape follower reg-
ulatory focus’, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 140, pp. 29–45.
Judge, T. A., E. A. Locke, C. C. Durham and A. N. Kluger
(1998). ‘Dispositional effects on job and life satisfaction: the
role of core evaluations’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 83,
pp. 17–34.
Kark, R. and D. van Dijk (2007). ‘Motivation to lead, motiva-
tion to follow: the role of the self-regulatory focus in leadership
processes’, Academy of Management Review, 32, pp. 500–528.
Kark, R. and D. van Dijk (2019). ‘Keep your head in the clouds
and your feet on the ground: a multifocal review of leadership–
followership self-regulatory focus’, Academy of Management
Annals, 13, pp. 509–546.
Kelemen, T. K., S. H. Matthews and K. Breevaart (2019). ‘Lead-
ing day-to-day: a review of the daily causes and consequences
of leadership behaviors’, The Leadership Quarterly, 101344.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.101344.
Academy of Management.

Managers’ Resources for Authentic Leadership
Kernis, M. H. (2003). ‘Toward a conceptualization of optimal
self-esteem’, Psychological Inquiry, 14, pp. 1–26.
Kim, J., K. Chen, W. E. Davis, J. A. Hicks and R. J. Schlegel
(2019). ‘Approaching the true self: promotion focus predicts
the experience of authenticity’, Journal of Research in Person-
ality, 78, pp. 165–176.
Kish-Gephart, J. J., D. A. Harrison and L. K. Treviño (2010).
‘Bad apples, bad cases, and bad barrels: meta-analytic evidence
about sources of unethical decisions at work’, Journal of Ap-
plied Psychology, 95, pp. 1–31.
Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation
Modeling, 4th edn. New York: Guilford Press.
Knoll, M., B. Meyer, N. B. Kroemer and M. Schröder-Abé
(2015). ‘It takes two to be yourself: an integrated model of
authenticity, its measurement, and its relationship to work-
related variables’, Journal of Individual Differences, 36, pp. 38–
53.
Koerner, M. M. (2014). ‘Courage as identity work: accounts
of workplace courage’, Academy of Management Journal, 57,
pp. 63–93.
Krohne, H. W., B. Egloff and C. W. Kohlmann (1996). ‘Un-
tersuchungen mit einer deutschen Version der “Positive and
Negative Affect Schedule” (PANAS) [Investigations with a
German version of the “Positive and Negative Affect Sched-
ule” (PANAS)]’, Diagnostica, 42, pp. 139–156.
Lanaj, K., C.-H. D. Chang and R. E. Johnson (2012). ‘Regu-
latory focus and work-related outcomes: a review and meta-
analysis’, Psychological Bulletin, 138, pp. 998–1034.
Lanaj, K., T. A. Foulk and A. Erez (2019). ‘Energizing leaders
via self-reflection: a within-person field experiment’, Journal
of Applied Psychology, 104, pp. 1–18.
Lemoine, G. J., C. A. Hartnell and H. Leroy (2019). ‘Taking stock
of moral approaches to leadership: an integrative review of eth-
ical, authentic, and servant leadership’, Academy of Manage-
ment Annals, 13, pp. 148–187.
Lenton, A. P., L. Slabu, C. Sedikides and K. Power (2013). ‘I
feel good, therefore I am real: testing the causal influence
of mood on state authenticity’, Cognition & Emotion, 27,
pp. 1202–1224.
Leroy, H., F. Anseel, W. L. Gardner and L. Sels (2015). ‘Authentic
leadership, authentic followership, basic need satisfaction, and
work role performance: a cross-level study’, Journal of Man-
agement, 41, pp. 1677–1697.
Luthans, F. and C. M. Youssef-Morgan (2017). ‘Psychological
capital: an evidence-based positive approach’, Annual Review
of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4,
pp. 339–366.
Luthans, F., C. M. Youssef-Morgan and B. J. Avolio (2015). Psy-
chological Capital and Beyond. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Luthans, F., J. B. Avey, B. J. Avolio, S. M. Norman and G. M.
Combs (2006). ‘Psychological capital development: toward a
micro-intervention’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27,
pp. 387–393.
Luthans, F., B. J. Avolio, J. B. Avey and S. M. Norman (2007).
‘Positive psychological capital: measurement and relationship
with performance and satisfaction’, Personnel Psychology, 60,
pp. 541–572.
Mackinnon, A., A. F. Jorm, H. Christensen, A. E. Korten,
P. A. Jacomb and B. Rodgers (1999). ‘A short form of the
positive and negative affect schedule: evaluation of factorial
validity and invariance across demographic variables in a com-

C2020 The Authors. British Journal of Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British
Academy of Management.
14678551, 2020, 2, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8551.12396 by Quaid-I-Azam University, Wiley Online Library on [11/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
341
munity sample’, Personality and Individual Differences, 27,
pp. 405–416.
Martin, K. D. and J. B. Cullen (2006). ‘Continuities and exten-
sions of ethical climate theory: a meta-analytic review’, Journal
of Business Ethics, 69, pp. 175–194.
May, D. R., A. Y. L. Chan, T. D. Hodges and B. J. Avolio (2003).
‘Developing the moral component of authentic leadership’,
Organizational Dynamics, 32, pp. 247–260.
McClean, S. T., C. M. Barnes, S. H. Courtright and R. E. John-
son (2019). ‘Resetting the clock on dynamic leader behav-
iors: a conceptual integration and agenda for future research’,
Academy of Management Annals, 13, pp. 479–508.
McCormick, B. W., C. J. Reeves, P. E. Downes, N. Li and R. Ilies
(2018). ‘Scientific contributions of within-person research in
management: making the juice worth the squeeze’, Journal of
Management, 46, pp. 321–350.
Miller, C. C. and P. Bamberger (2016). ‘Exploring emergent
and poorly understood phenomena in the strangest of places:
the footprint of discovery in replications, meta-analyses,
and null findings’, Academy of Management Discoveries, 2,
pp. 313–319.
Monzani, L., S. Braun and R. van Dick (2016). ‘It takes
two to tango: the interactive effect of authentic leadership
and organizational identification on employee silence inten-
tions’, German Journal of Human Resource Management, 30,
pp. 246–266.
Muthén, B. O. and L. K. Muthén (2017). Mplus User’s Guide, 8th
edn. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
Neider, L. L. and C. A. Schriesheim (2011). ‘The authentic lead-
ership inventory (ALI): development and empirical tests’, The
Leadership Quarterly, 22, pp. 1146–1164.
Neubert, M. J., C. Wu and J. A. Roberts (2013). ‘The influence
of ethical leadership and regulatory focus on employee out-
comes’, Business Ethics Quarterly, 23, pp. 269–296.
Neubert, M. J., K. M. Kacmar, D. S. Carlson, L. B. Chonko and J.
A. Roberts (2008). ‘Regulatory focus as a mediator of the influ-
ence of initiating structure and servant leadership on employee
behavior’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, pp. 1220–1233.
Ng, T. W. H. and D. C. Feldman (2012). ‘Employee voice be-
havior: a meta-analytic test of the conservation of resources
framework’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33, pp. 216–
234.
Nübold, A., N. van Quaquebeke and U. R. Hülsheger (2019).
‘Be(com)ing real: a multi-source and an intervention study on
mindfulness and authentic leadership’, Journal of Business and
Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-019-09633-y.
Ohly, S., S. Sonnentag, C. Niessen and D. Zapf (2010). ‘Diary
studies in organizational research’, Journal of Personnel Psy-
chology, 9, pp. 79–93.
Peer, E., L. Brandimarte, S. Samat and A. Acquisti (2017). ‘Be-
yond the Turk: alternative platforms for crowdsourcing behav-
ioral research’, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 70,
pp. 153–163.
Petersen, K. and C. M. Youssef-Morgan (2018). ‘The “left side”
of authentic leadership: contributions of climate and psycho-
logical capital’, Leadership & Organization Development Jour-
nal, 39, pp. 436–452.
Peus, C. (2011). ‘Money over man versus caring and compassion?
Challenges for today’s organizations and their leaders’, Journal
of Organizational Behavior, 32, pp. 955–960.
Peus, C., J. S. Wesche, B. Streicher, S. Braun and D. Frey (2012).
‘Authentic leadership: an empirical test of its antecedents,

342
consequences, and mediating mechanisms’, Journal of Business
Ethics, 107, pp. 331–348.
Pierce, J. L. and D. G. Gardner (2004). ‘Self-esteem within the
work and organizational context: a review of the organization-
based self-esteem literature’, Journal of Management, 30,
pp. 591–622.
Podsakoff, P. M., S. B. MacKenzie and N. P. Podsakoff (2012).
‘Sources of method bias in social science research and recom-
mendations on how to control it’, Annual Review of Psychol-
ogy, 63, pp. 539–569.
Podsakoff, N. P., T. M. Spoelma, N. Chawla and A. S. Gabriel
(2019). ‘What predicts within-person variance in applied psy-
chology constructs? An empirical examination’, Journal of Ap-
plied Psychology, 104, pp. 727–754.
R Core Team (2017). R: A language and environment for statisti-
cal computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Rosen, C. C., L. S. Simon, R. S. Gajendran, R. E. Johnson, H.
W. Lee and S.-H. J. Lin (2019). ‘Boxed in by your inbox: im-
plications of daily e-mail demands for managers’ leadership
behaviors’, Journal of Applied Psychology, 104, pp. 19–33.
Rosseel, Y. (2012). ‘lavaan: an R package for structural
equation modeling’, Journal of Statistical Software, 48.
https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02.
Sarason, I. G. and B. R. Sarason (2009). ‘Social support: map-
ping the construct’, Journal of Social and Personal Relation-
ships, 26, pp. 113–120.
Sassenberg, K. and M. R. W. Hamstra (2017). ‘The intrapersonal
and interpersonal dynamics of self-regulation in the leadership
process’, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 55, pp.
193–257.
Schminke, M., M. L. Ambrose and D. O. Neubaum (2005). ‘The
effect of leader moral development on ethical climate and em-
ployee attitudes’, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
Processes, 97, pp. 135–151.
Schneider, B., M. G. Ehrhart and W. H. Macey (2013). ‘Orga-
nizational climate and culture’, Annual Review of Psychology,
64, pp. 361–388.
Seligman, M. E. P. (2006). Learned Optimism: How to Change
Your Mind and Your Life. New York: Random House.
Shamir, B. (2011). ‘Leadership takes time: some implications of
(not) taking time seriously in leadership research’, The Lead-
ership Quarterly, 22, pp. 307–315.
Shamir, B. and G. Eilam (2005). ‘“What’s your story?” A life-
stories approach to authentic leadership development’, The
Leadership Quarterly, 16, pp. 395–417.
Sidani, Y. M. and W. G. Rowe (2018). ‘A reconceptualization of
authentic leadership: leader legitimation via follower-centered
assessment of the moral dimension’, The Leadership Quarterly,
29, pp. 623–636.
Sparrowe, R. T. (2005). ‘Authentic leadership and the narrative
self’, The Leadership Quarterly, 16, pp. 419–439.
Stajkovic, A. D. and F. Luthans (1998). ‘Self-efficacy and work-
related performance: a meta-analysis’, Psychological Bulletin,
124, pp. 240–261.
Steffens, N. K., F. Mols, S. A. Haslam and T. G. Okimoto (2016).
‘True to what we stand for: championing collective interests as
a path to authentic leadership’, The Leadership Quarterly, 27,
pp. 726–744.

C 2020 The Authors. British Journal of Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British
14678551, 2020, 2, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8551.12396 by Quaid-I-Azam University, Wiley Online Library on [11/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
M. P. Fladerer and S. Braun
ten Brummelhuis, L. L. and A. B. Bakker (2012). ‘A resource
perspective on the work–home interface: the work–home re-
sources model’, American Psychologist, 67, pp. 545–556.
To, C., G. J. Kilduff, L. Ordoñez and M. E. Schweitzer (2018).
‘Going for it on fourth down: rivalry increases risk taking,
physiological arousal, and promotion focus’, Academy of Man-
agement Journal, 61, pp. 1281–1306.
Treviño, L. K., G. R. Weaver, D. G. Gibson and B. L. Toffler
(1999). ‘Managing ethics and legal compliance: what works
and what hurts’, California Management Review, 41, pp. 131–
151.
Tuncdogan, A., F. van den Bosch and H. Volberda (2015). ‘Reg-
ulatory focus as a psychological micro-foundation of leaders’
exploration and exploitation activities’, The Leadership Quar-
terly, 26, pp. 838–850.
van Buuren, S. and K. Groothuis-Oudshoorn (2011). ‘mice: mul-
tivariate imputation by chained equations in R’, Journal of Sta-
tistical Software, 45. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v045.i03.
van Prooijen, A.-M. and N. Ellemers (2015). ‘Does it pay to be
moral? How indicators of morality and competence enhance
organizational and work team attractiveness’, British Journal
of Management, 26, pp. 225–236.
van Sandt, C. V., J. M. Shepard and S. M. Zappe (2006). ‘An
examination of the relationship between ethical work climate
and moral awareness’, Journal of Business Ethics, 68, pp. 409–
432.
Victor, B. and J. B. Cullen (1988). ‘The organizational bases of
ethical work climates’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 33,
pp. 101–125.
Vohs, K. D. and N. J. Ciarocco (2004). ‘Interpersonal functioning
requires self-regulation’. In R. F. Baumeister and K. D. Vohs
(eds), Handbook of Self-regulation: Research, Theory, and Ap-
plications, pp. 392–407. New York: Guilford Press.
Walumbwa, F. O., B. J. Avolio, W. L. Gardner, T. S. Wernsing
and S. J. Peterson (2008). ‘Authentic leadership: development
and validation of a theory-based measure’, Journal of Manage-
ment, 34, pp. 89–126.
Weiss, M., S. Razinskas, J. Backmann and M. Hoegl (2018). ‘Au-
thentic leadership and leaders’ mental well-being: an experi-
ence sampling study’, The Leadership Quarterly, 29, pp. 309–
321.
Whitman, M. V., J. R. B. Halbesleben and O. Holmes (2014).
‘Abusive supervision and feedback avoidance: the mediating
role of emotional exhaustion’, Journal of Organizational Be-
havior, 35, pp. 38–53.
Xanthopoulou, D., A. B. Bakker, E. Demerouti and W. B.
Schaufeli (2007). ‘The role of personal resources in the job
demands–resources model’, International Journal of Stress
Management, 14, pp. 121–141.
Xanthopoulou, D., A. B. Bakker, E. Demerouti and W. B.
Schaufeli (2009). ‘Work engagement and financial returns: a
diary study on the role of job and personal resources’, Journal
of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 82, pp. 183–
200.
Zacher, H. and R. G. Wilden (2014). ‘A daily diary study on am-
bidextrous leadership and self-reported employee innovation’,
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 87,
pp. 813–820.
Academy of Management.
 14678551, 2020, 2, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8551.12396 by Quaid-I-Azam University, Wiley Online Library on [11/05/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Managers’ Resources for Authentic Leadership 343

Martin P. Fladerer is Research Associate at the Center for Leadership and People Management, LMU
Munich. His research focuses on leadership and identity processes in organizational contexts.

Susanne Braun is Professor in Leadership at Durham University Business School. Her research focuses
on leadership, identity dynamics and the dark triad in organizations.

Supporting Information
Additional supporting information may be found online in the Supporting Information section at the end
of the article.

Table S1: Study 2: Test of higher-order structure of authentic leadership

Table S1: Study 2: Test of higher-order factor structure of positive psychological capacities


C2020 The Authors. British Journal of Management published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British
Academy of Management.